Simple solution to both problems: make it an unsupported cheatcode.
Thatâs not the point, combat system might quite simply not work at all in 3rd person. Not mechanically, technically.
Donât really see why, controls are going to be the same regardless of whatâs sent to the monitor.
The problem is, this game is one of a kind.
Itâs the only medieval game without bullshit magic, and enough budget. WOTR was supposed to have singleplayer, and the multiplayer was immensely unbalanced and became retarded. Chivalry didnât have that much going for it, few mechanics and content, and also (first person), but no story or real universe content.
So I put a lot of hopes on KCD, backing it, to have access to forums and beta, to give feedback, and have a say in it.
So it would be more like the game I want (i know selfish) or just better. Because we donât have that much choice in this kind of games.
So this is the argument about, I say third person is better, because of multiple reasons, so it becomes closer to perfection.
To give you my point of view: I donât want a simulation, i want a game, if you want a simulation, sell your pc (if you do not have the funding) and go to a club, if there isnât any in the proximity, start one, youâll have enough members if you look for them. (also i want the skill to depend on my mind, not my reflexes (iâm not 12 years old) which is conflicting with the simulation, not necessarily with the realism/believability.)
How much of the gameâs code have you seen to be so certain?
Contrary to popular belief, you are not an investor, and you have absolutely no say in how is the title going to develop, especially if itâs directly in opposition to what they have promised in the first place. You have given Warhorse your money and they are now going to do whatever they want with it.
3 Likes
I just got an idea that might work for this! Now before I say it I have to say that Iâm not suggesting this for KCD, just brainstorming. So third and first person views could be switched back and forth while not in combat and instead of switching to first person when enemies are near, the player could press a key that draws the characters sword or puts him in a combat stance and locks him in first person. If the player himself senses danger he can ready himself but if he is caught unawares an ambush could be completely successful.
1 Like
If the dev team had said âno 3rd personâ, why this discussion is so long?
I gave my money to WH so they could do the game as they stated. One of those promises was 1st person open world. If you give your money too, then you are paying for a 1st person open world game, no 3rd or mixed or view from a satellite.
Update #6 is very clear:
Again: we do not plan to allow you to control your character in 3rd person view
What else is to add? We are not designers/developers/investor. You are a costumer of a final product. If you like it, you buy it. If you donât, buy another game.
3 Likes
If they do change their mind, and frankly since the game will also go to consoles 3rd person is likely, I hope they do it like Skyrim (I played that in first person, except for a few scenes where I wanted to see how cool my character looked, and a few times when I noticed people looked at me funny and I needed to check if I ran out of the house without pants again).
I donât see why people want 3rd person, with exception to the people who get motion sickness:
- In 3rd person you can look around corners, and that is stupid, but when you play in 3rd person you will do it, because you can.
- In 3rd person you do not see things because you are standing in your own way. This is especially true when going through narrow corridors.
- 3rd person may give you more situational awareness, but limits your control over things done in detail close by.
I donât get people who oppose the option for 3rd person view either:
- given that some people cannot play 1st person, itâs pure sadism,
- itâs not a multiplayer game so what if the other guy can do things you cannot, thatâs like liking to play a game on the hardest setting and demanding there not be an easy mode for the whimps,
- have you ever played a first person game with a gamepad? Really hard I tell you, and I understood there would be console ports.
1 Like
Itâs not opposing to 3rd person. I like 3rd person games (such as Fallout 1 & 2, Wasteland 2âŠ).
But this game was planned (and sold) as 1st person, so I donât see the point in asking for 3rd for this game.
Itâs easy to do it? I donât care. It could be extremelly easy (but I really doubt that!) to made the game with 3rd person view, but every line the devs have to write to made the game different from what they promise is a line less I get for the game I paid.
As I said: If you donât like 1st person view⊠Why did you pay for it?
2 Likes
I do believe that the main argument here is that people donât want devs spending resources and manpower on third person when warhorse could just do something else, like polishing up the game. If implementation is as easy as just allowing for the default Crysis 3rd person camera, I just see no reason why they would not do it, but if it actually costs them time and money, I could see why people who put money into it with promise of no 3rd person would object to this.
I have played ~100 hours of Skyrim on a pad. On a PC. In first person view. Using spells/crossbow. Itâs perfectly fine.
Could be great!
I really think that could be nice
Ok, hereâs another idea Iâve got.
I tried to put it into some kind of Q&A form.
Q:
Why did Warhorse create the game in 1st person specifically?
A:
Because they wanted to!
Further explanation:
Itâs very likely that they designed the game deliberately for 1st-person only because they want you to experience the game in this way.
For example, in films, the director has a scene already in his mind before shooting it, maybe even the solutions how to achieve this vision. He has ideas how the setting has to look, which perspectives and angles have to be used, how the actors have to move and how they have to say something etc. This way he can emphasize certain aspects he deems important while he is also able to evoke a particular range of emotions in the viewer.
So, the unavailability of 3rd-person basically boils down to the fact (apart from the major redesign effort we already know of) that they donât want the player to use 3rd-person because it canât deliver the experience theyâre striving for or have envisioned when they were starting to develop the game. Consequently theyâve chosen to take this approach out of artistic reasons.
Therefore itâs not just about âCan they do it?â (feasibility) but also about âDo they want to do it?â (intention). I think, that should also be considered in this whole thought process.
We believe that FPV allows for better immersion in the world
Just a little thought on the whole âWhy no 3rd-person?â thing.
I mentioned this also in a similar thread.
5 Likes
they can be wrongâŠ
Definitely approve of the 1st person viewâŠ
TPS just gets in the way and produces some aggravating camera workâŠ
I saw some misconceptions about the oculus rift, that it had to be used with first person. That third person doesnât work with oculus rift. I looked into it.
And it doesnât matter at all. First or third influence on oculus rift, no difference. Except oculus is a cheaper solution than buying multiple screens or massive screens. Which is needed for a working first person. Third person works in all situations, 1 screen, multiple screens, or oculus rift
Oculus just gives large field of view, and gives you a cinematic feeling, no necessarily immersive.
Third person in skyrim is done very poorly. Skyrim is made for first person, with almost no attention to third person.
So the option is there, but not evenly distributed
Somethings I believe they could do:
- No HUD - takes off the realism;
- Inventory system like The Witcher 2 - your caracter needs to be off battle, and thereâs an animation of him sitting and opening a bag, or something;
- No 3rd Person - personal preference.
You might consider to stop talking about misconceptions about 3rd person and then flatout lying about 1st person. It sort of undermines your credibility.
You should copy the rest of the comment, so the context is there.
And no iâm not lying
for a proper first person experience you need multiple screen or wider screens (which are probably not on the market) or oculus rift.
Of course you can still enjoy it, but its just good enough, we kind of misuse it.
And if you think iâm wrong; lying =/= delusion
You still donât know how to edit?
Nonsense!
The only thing youâve got right is that VR is not immersive, because itâs even far better than that! Just one word: presence!
Even if youâre knowing exactly that you arenât there, your body and your brain on a subconscious level react as if you were there!
VR is not just wider FOV plus head tracking!
All these requirements need to be fulfilled, not just one or two!
Please, inform yourself, watch this:
and read this:
Yeah? So, even if itâs there you canât stop whining.
See, even 3rd-person wouldnât change anything for you, but keep the lame excuses coming. 